In the first IPO of an automaker since Ford went public in 1956, Telsa Motors has filed with the SEC an application to sell shares to the public and become a publicly traded company.
This is seen as a victory of sorts for the Silicon Valley start-up company that has been plagued with difficulties, controversies and delays. It is another landmark on the path to electrification of the automobile for the company that Bob Lutz admits inspired the Volt concept. Its CEO Elon Musk, billionaire founder of PayPal is not one to give up, and he has been pushing for this event for some time.
The timing of the IPO is not specified but is expected to raise $100 million dollar or more for the sale of shares. Telsa has already received $465 million in goverment loans for the building of its Model S sedan assembly plant and a powertrain plant.
In the filing Tesla, has indicated it has sold 937 Roadsters for $109,000 each. In the first three quarters of last year the company lost $31 million on revenue of $93 million.
The company warns that revenue is likely to become lower until 2012 when the Model S Pure EV goes into production. The car was initially projected to go on sale in 2011, but was moved back. There are 2000 people who have put down $5000 deposits for it. Tesla will also acutally be ending the production of its current 2-seat Roadster in 2011, for which there are only 220 more backorders. A replacement isn’t due until 2013.
The filing also contains an easter-egg of sorts for current Tesla owners. They will be considered “friends and family” of Tesla which means they will be permitted the option of purchasing shares of the company at its inital price prior to entering the secondary public market. This is a way for Tesla to extend their appreciation to their loyal early customers.
This year is also expected to potentially bring the IPO of the new GM.
Risks or rewards. Will you buy these companies’ shares?
This entry was posted on Sunday, January 31st, 2010 at 8:15 am and is filed under BEV, Competitors, Financial. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+2
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:22 am)So will we get a “Easter Egg” in’s GM IPO if we buy a Volt?
BTW – Nice to see a timely Telsa article…
Any finally, after see the roadster next to the Model S (never saw them side by side), I personally still think the roadster is the nicer looking car..
+5
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:22 am)Without a car to sell and the delays on the launch of the roadster, I don’t think this is going to end well, unless Musk floats the company for a bit.
+12
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:24 am)I think I’ll save my pennies for a Volt.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+4
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:25 am)No way I would buy shares in Tesla or GM IPOs. The sector is too risky for my taste.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:28 am)The Easter Egg Tidbit is news I missed. Hopefully that extends to those of us w/a deposit on the Model S.
+2
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:42 am)Good question Guy #1. What will GM do with the list of 51,000+ people here at gm volt dot com?
There is a Kawasaki dealer in Santa Barbara that offers 50% off accessories within a 3 month period after purchase. This includes: pipes, bags, windshields, and other custom items. Perhaps we will be offered the flat sticker price on the 2012 Volt plus an accessory discount? Solar recharge blanket and other accessories. Just walk in with your gm volt dot com code and pick your color. I think this is fair. What do you think?
=D~
+23
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:11 am)Did I get the sequence of events right? Tesla takes a Lotus chassis and an AC Propulsion drive train and builds a hella car, but it costs $109,000. They lose $30m on revenue of $90m last year. The government gives them a $465m loan. Lotus casually mentions that Lotus will no longer be building the chassis Tesla uses for the Roadster so they might not be building the Roadster after 2011. The Model S is supposed to start delivery in 2012, but it has already been delayed once. What do you call a car company that has no cars for sale? Tesla better buy extra chassis or move up the Model S delivery date.
But to top it all off, this car company, that has yet to build 1,000 cars in nearly TWO years of production, is offering an IPO. Wow. That is impressive. The audacity, I mean. The car is impressive too, but what is amazing to me, is that I am still rooting for these guys. But I hope the government has not just first right to Tesla’s assets if they fail, but that they can sell the Tesla’s technology to the highest bidder in the event of a Tesla bankruptcy. I would love to see Tesla become a real car company selling thousands of BEV’s a WEEK, but if they fall apart it would be great to see Ford leapfrog the electric Focus and build the Model S in large numbers benefiting from the economies of scale and a huge presence world wide. Fords Model S vs. GMs Voltec Technology, that would be a battle that could change the way we look at oil.
+8
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:15 am)If there were a floor tax on gasoline or oil, I would be much more likely to invest.
+8
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:18 am)Ziv is spot on. In its IPO filing Tesla notes that it will stop making the roadster in 2011 and will not have the next model available until 2013. With the Model S not slated to come out until 2012 – a date that may well slip -, it will go a year without anything to sell.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/29/wait-what-tesla-to-kill-the-roadster-in-2011/
Two words: Caveat emptor!
-2
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:30 am)Two words: RUN AWAY!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+3
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:49 am)I take it Static’s on vacation? I’d get the heck out of Canada (or at least over to a ski slope) right now too. For what little my take on financial issues is worth, I took a flyer on some A123 stock after all the exposure here, and after doing some research. They have lost money, but I think the long-term prospects are good because they do weird things like, you know, sell stuff. I also waited to pay a reasonable price in November, and avoided the IPO price swing. I’m still in the green in the stock, while I suspect that a lot of folks are in the red. So I suppose if you really believe in Tesla you could take a flyer, but I would figure out a reasonable price and not get caught up in what happens the first month or so.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:51 am)Any delays at all in the introduction of the Model S will be DISASTROUS.. hopefully they can stock up on extra chassis to tide them over on the Roadster but the survival of the company looks iffy.
Hopefully Musk can make some money off SpaceX by selling launch services to finicky NASA… and as long as no rockets blow up.
Note that Tesla makes their own battery packs and motor/inverter.. they outsource SOME parts to Lotus.
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:04 am)You’re right; emotions usually control stock prices on IPO’s. Wait until things settle, but I still won’t invest. Musk is arrogant and in the auto world that is dangerous, just ask the former GM!
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:08 am)Tesla buys a windshield and an aluminum chassis from Lotus, to the chassis they add battery support and widens/lengthens it to make each Roadster.. they want to make a new generation of the Roadster with a lower center of gravity, probably by relocating the battery under the floor similar to the Model S.
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:09 am)So, now oil companies can by Tesla and make it bankrupt?
+4
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:18 am)I predict when Tesla starts making sedans, they will strike a deal with GM to use GM’s battery pack. It wouldn’t surprise me if GM bought Tesla when GM gets healthy.
I don’t think Tesla can make it on it’s own.
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:23 am)Statik posted a couple of very cogent, fact-filled posts yesterday on the IPO application for Tesla. Very gloomy outlook by my lay person reading of it.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-4
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:23 am)This is just typical hitech startup money grab, think the dot com bust, same people, different product.
There is a zero percent chance that the people investing 100 million will ever see a positive return on the capital …
+4
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:29 am)************ The Perfect American Workbench ************
This will be the perfect learning experience on about fifteen levels for America. In this second hundred years of motoring, this would be another learning renewal for American investment, IPO practicality, EV technological growth, integrating EV challenges into acceptable transportation, open reporting of a companies’ balance sheets, boldness in American venturing, unification of the initial customers into a stock-purchase-rate and cost microscope, adaptability of management, resiliency of engineering to overcome fault challenges, and on and on.
I say, the IPO ought to be approved. If for anything else but an opening of the learning experience based on all manner of technologies as a motivation for investment research. Why ought or ought not anyone buy shares? Who gets what in the proceeds? Are there preferred stock shares? How do/will thier stock(s) work and perform? How can all these IPO activites themselves help to spur more in-depth electric motoring interests, commitments, and loyalties by Americans?
I see a set of very enjoyable things to learn from an IPO granted to Tesla.
While it would actually have Tesla on a more open pathway as has been GM’s, I really am convinced that it would be a very healthy thing for the SEC and other agencies to approve Tesla on grounds that all these above questions, (however outcomes answer them), have a far more meritous ****set*** of financial benefits to America than for just the monetary values considered alone; Learning.
GM has shown America and the World the ‘electric way’ with the open dialogues right here, especially from all the outstanding and brilliant engineers and management that have posted here in helping us all to understand Voltec.
Tesla must be allowed to do the very same thing on behalf of EV prospective customers. There would not be a better way to accomplish this than with an approval of the IPO.
Why?
It is critical to not sell any product to anyone who would not properly benefit from it. I will advise a customer that an expensive piece of equipment is not the right thing for them by saying “this/that will not help you”.
With an American IPO, it is more likely for us to become educated as to the right person for the right EV/EREV, as opposed to a foreign company who may hide (or feel compelled to hide) a severe safety defect. (FreePress today says 12 people died in the accelerator pedal problem of Toyota, and, Toyota stonewalled).
(One State Trooper and his family getting killed is horrific enough, but, now, I learn that 12 people got killed, and, I am not just a little bit furious about that arrogant stonewalling. Go read it if you would.)
America needs the investment vision again into small and medium sized American companies again. For too long, small companies have been corruptly-sidelined as insufficient somehow, and, it can easily be proved that given even the most modest investments, the small and very small companies can not only outperform the mid sized ones, but, through relentless competance, the mid and larger companies take notice of the very small companies, ‘get it’, and become better merchants after all.
All the eggs are in too few baskets regarding American investment into medium sized corporations. The large corporations are so large, that they have had to do battle with not only technologies, but, do battle with public opinion. The magazines are controlled by far far far too few technically insufficient individuals who have excessive influence for thier comprehension levels on behalf of the motoring public.
I do feel badly at the same time however, for Toyota, (what a mix of influences coming at us, but, at least they went for agressive ‘shut-downs’, to their credit). However, for now they have to pay the prices, partly from being too massive it seems to me.
While I personally would not invest in Tesla (not my technical flavor as everyone knows), I would encourage others in metropolitan areas to study Tesla financials daily, if only for the BEV learning experience.
If I did have funding to spare, (which I don’t because I have to keep my operating margins as tight as possible to be as competitive as possible), But if I did have a small amount of spare funding, I would look for that day when GM stock becomes available and buy, just to be part of it.
-1
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:43 am)/rips keyboard from computer
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:14 am)GM has a lot of cash right now and a greatly improved balance shett and also needs some “green” cred. THey should scoop up tesla and cement their lead in electrics overnight. SO whats the alternative ,let china or worse toyota buy them out.
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:16 am)Of all the solar powered recharging gadgets, this one may be the most ingenious! In Africa, people are using solar powered blankets to recharge cell phones so that they can make emergency calls or text messages – even without electricity.
The Portable Light iTEACH Blanket is touted as helping to save lives in Third World countries. Flexible solar panels are incorporated into the blankets’ design. Users can literally plug in cell phones to recharge them in off-grid areas, saving power and, more importantly, lives.
______________________________
Solar dashboard cover for the Volt?
=D~
+6
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:20 am)They don’t need Tesla. If they wanted to produce a $60,000 BEV they could do it right away with the knowledge they are refining right now with the Volt and the Electric Equinox fleet they have on the road.
+3
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:35 am)#7 ZIV, you pretty well summed it up. Are you sure you’re not related to STATIK?
Mixed feelings. Maybe if the Volt price is really set close to $30K I could take the difference and invest it in Tesla. Or better yet maybe NGM.
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:37 am)I have definitely considered buying stock in the new GM when it goes public. The question is do I try to buy into the IPO right away, or do I wait for the stock to settle after the initial media hype? I have a feeling that while this sector is certainly risky, stock in the new GM will be available at bargain prices. George, Canada.
+4
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:37 am)26.
Guy Incognito Says:
January 31st, 2010 at 11:37 am
I think its a good thing that companies like Fisker & Tesla are receiving taxpayer money to produce pure BEV’s and Serial Plug-In Hybrids, but what troubles me is that neither of these companies manufacture a family car that is affordable by the Middle Class.
So, even though the technology exists, and has for a while, right now the only one’s that can have a pure BEV or Serial Plug-In Hybrid are rich people, subsidized by the taxpayers, the majority of which are in fact Middle Class, and thus cannot afford the very vehicles their tax dollars are being used to build.
All for to build a rich man’s plaything.
+2
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:38 am)I agree with ziv.
The Tesla Roadster has generated interest in EV’s, that’s for sure. As an investment, I would pass on it. As an alternative, I would suggest investing in Ener1 / EnerDel…..
http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=39831
I do believe Tesla may have already shot itself in the foot with a key decision. I believe they should have based vehicle manufacturing as close as possible to the battery source.
The last thing I read said Downey, California was going to be the assembly site for the vehicle …. http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_13956838
Tesla should have chosen a Midwest production site close to automotive grade cell / battery manufacturing plants that are coming online in Michigan and Indiana. I have yet to read any details stating the battery pack will use large prismatic automotive cells. In contrast, I’ve read the base pack will have 5000+ Panasonic laptop cells.
I’ve also read the Model S will carry an onboard charger that will work with 120, 240 and 480 Volt outlets…. http://www.gizmag.com/tesla-model-s/11386/
Recently, a standard for “quick charging” has emerged…
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/01/akerwade-20100115.html
I’d suggest Tesla embrace the new large format cells ASAP and produce the Model S with a pack that contains them. In addition, they should adopt the TEPCO Level 3 “fast charge” standard if they haven’t already.
The Model S is reported to support “battery swapping” in about 5 minutes. I can see that being handy for servicing at a Tesla dealership but that’s about it.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:38 am)For an investor as opposed to a “flipper” IPOs are invariably a bad idea. The company usually rides a wave of hype and picks the time to sell, which is usually a bad time to buy. If you buy and hold you’re more or less guaranteed a loss, and a long term capital loss at that, unless you’re willing to hold the stock for a very long time. (If memory serves me correctly if you buy at the end of the first trading day you will need to hold the stock for 16 years to get average market performance). Maybe if you were “friends and family” you can flip as the panic buying sets in on the first day but other than that you’re best advised to avoid an IPO.
Tesla is an interesting study because making cars is far more capital intensive than anything Silicon Valley ever handles. To me the guys at Tesla missed this fact and, doubtless filled with hubris, thought that they could do it on the cheap. Guess again. This isn’t PayPal.
If Tesla can’t profitably sell a two seater for $100,000+ it’s hard to understand how it can profitably sell a larger car for $60,000. In this regard I’ll note that Fisker has found it easier to raise money, which should tell you something. My guess is that Musk’s game plan remains the one he knows, which is to find the “bigger fool”. IOW create top line revenue and hope that some large established company — Mercedes? — with deep pockets will be dumb enough to buy the revenue and the technology with that thought that they are so brilliant they can succeed where you failed. (You have no idea how many times you can sell a business to a big company and then buy it back at a very steep discount after they find out they aren’t quite as good at they thought they were). Hmmmm…… maybe instead of the “bigger fool” play it’s a “bigger ego” play.
+3
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:42 am)I wouldn’t call it a battle. More like rout. Pure BEVs will reamin niche cars for brave souls. EREVs will go mainstream.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:43 am)I can hear it all the way down hear! lol.
+8
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:43 am)Say what you will, but that Model S (dumb name) is a great looking car. I would love to drive one.
+7
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:47 am)More like two different approaches to solving a similar problem. Automobiles have never followed the “one solution fits all” philosophy.
The EREV satisfies a specific market segment, the BEV fits a different segment. They can both survive independently, and they can both flourish.
+3
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:56 am)Blah, Blah, Blah…..
Call me when I can go and sit inside a Model S.
In the car business, it isn’t about the stock, it is about the hardware! If you don’t have any cars to sell, who would want to buy the stock???
Or am I missing something?
Jan 31st, 2010 (11:57 am)DonC,
I am with you 100% on this one.
The infrastructure and costs associated with building any sort of high volume vehicle, is enormous. Plus you need to set up a huge distribution network, that needs constant tending (kinda of similiar to moving from growing tomatoes in your backyard to buying a farm to grow hundreds of thousands…).
The auto industry players require so many supporting players, that it is almost impossible to find a seat at the table. Especially when times in the auto industry are in such poor shape.
If your looking for a place to throw you money away, I would suggest Las Vegas. At least you get to enjoy the scenery!
Jan 31st, 2010 (12:19 pm)I’d be more interested in investing in SolarCity. That would make a real difference, today.
+7
Jan 31st, 2010 (12:23 pm)With Tesla no, but with GM—–yes I would! GM has shed all the things that has weighed it down. No more health insurance, new workers getting paid half the wages, no more pension (only 401k) and great new products.
GM is not selling the cars they should in the USA, but in the rest of the world, they are making a killing.
Consumers in the US will come around, eventually.
With that said, I think GM has a bright future. When it comes to engineering, they are second to none!
Go GM Go!
+3
Jan 31st, 2010 (12:36 pm)As of July 09, Tesla is a profitable company.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/07/tesla-says-it-is-now-profitable-ships-109-roadsters-in-july/
I don’t get the anti Tesla sentiment on this site. This is a EV car enthusiast site right? People don’t like an American start up electric car company?
Without Tesla there would be no Volt.
+2
Jan 31st, 2010 (1:37 pm)I would never buy stock from Tesla so long as Musk is in charge.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (1:43 pm)I think their cars are an excellent additional offering out their as the world realizes BEVs. Still, I hope Musk isn’t like Steve Jobs once was regarding inflexibility. The Tesla could definitely benefit from range extenders until the electric infrastructure is well in place. Then range extenders are no longer needed.
Best of luck to all those companies helping the world get off Oil. Let’s hope the time will come with Middle-East oil barons actually say, “what do I do with this stuff.” Unlikely, but $147.00 per barrel is right around the corner without GM, Tesla, Fiat and others racing ahead with EVs.
+2
Jan 31st, 2010 (2:02 pm)To all the people complaining about Tesla not selling a family car, have you ever seen a new car company start out selling a family car for $20-30k (or any kind of affordable range)? All the smaller companies start out selling more expensive cars because it is practically impossible to start out with an affordable car that’s of any decent quality due to the massive volumes and manufacturing capability required to build an affordable family car. This goes for companies that start out with the traditional ICE engine; it’s even less possible for Tesla starting out with EVs (which we all know have very expensive components).
And on the survival of Tesla without a product, they survived 2-3 years before they released the Roadster. Sure, they were a smaller company then, but back then they didn’t have as much money either. Also keep in mind they have a battery pack supply deal with Daimler, which so far is profitable.
If you think about it, the decision will likely save more money in the long run. The tooling of the Model S will continue regardless of what they do with the Roadster. Lotus will be retooling so they can’t build the Roadster for some amount of time anyways, and since Tesla doesn’t own the tooling, the overhead would end as soon as they end production. This is a perfect time to decide to move the Roadster to their own platform, which will save money in the long run (no contract/shipping overhead and more shared parts). Also I think part of the decision is that Roadster sales may be drying up (220 backorders isn’t bad, but a lot lower than what they had before), so it may no longer be viable to produce it anyways.
-1
Jan 31st, 2010 (2:20 pm)I can’t read the article because there is a fu@king ad plastered right in front!
Not even a proper place to complain.
Don’t know how to get rid of it!!
-2
Jan 31st, 2010 (2:58 pm)I say, don’t Invest in tesla. Save your nickles and buy a volt next year. Then u will actually be a positive force instead of just wasting your hard earned money
Jan 31st, 2010 (3:28 pm)OT, but on NBC rightnow you guys can watch the Detroit Auto Show.
Jan 31st, 2010 (3:59 pm)Not exactly off topic, but,
over at Science Daily for today (01-31-10), there is a story about a new process (a study of how Gecko’s have nanotubes to hold themsleves onto walls, etc) resulting in a new process for the transfer of conducting and semi-conducting carbon nanotubes, which, if I understand the potentials of this, might someday allow for a more uniform deposition of the same-sized nanotubes [onto an anode or cathode]. (This relates directly to total surface areas.)
For GM Battery Labs: Might this make possible the reduction (or even elimination?) of individual cell balancing if all the nanotube characteristics of both the anodes and the cathodes can be made to become manufactured and sorted out somehow at an industrially-uniform microscopic size down to the nanometer?
We have heard of that requirement to sort out the various finished cells into compatible groups which are closely matched in their voltages, charge, and discharge characteristics. If the nanotubes can be removed/harvested, and, sorted out as to diameters, lengths, etc, with the original growing catalysts being completely left in place, then, one more revolutionary advance ***might*** be somehow possible.
Also, that might imply a standardization of carbon nanotube catalyst growing-”templates” that could be improved more and more as to nanotube production uniformities. And, each template “rated”.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (4:06 pm)Don’t you think they’ld be trying to raise substantially more than $100M if it were simply a pump & dump? The private investors can’t even come close to cashing out even with this.
Jan 31st, 2010 (4:09 pm)I lost money on GM, maybe some will be made with Tesla. But just like Apple, I’d rather use (drive) the product than just own the stock.
Jan 31st, 2010 (4:28 pm)Here’s another Volt AER idea that might be helpful to assure the maintenance of tire pressure in a Volt (or any other vehicle).
How about a dry nitrogen (which does not expand or contract nearly as much as does oxygen in a tire for varied tire pressures), how about a dry nitrogen containing **FOAM** that solidifies into the tire, yet, regular air can be added without that air mixing with the dry nitrogen flexible foam at the rated tire pressure? (And, for when a puncture occurs, and, a slight loss of dry nitrogen pressure occurs, regular air could be added without it mixing into the dry nitrogen-containing foam.). The air could be then evacuated later at time of puncture repair, and, more of the dry nitrogen foam installed. The foam would act like that insulation foam we use to seal air leaks in our homes, yet, be under the proper pressure as to GM specifications.
This idea is posted here as a suggestion to:
**PUBLIC DOMAIN**,
IN ORDER TO HELP us to do all the things all OEM’s need to do to reduce gasoline usage/CO2 production/Air pollution. Also, you aftermarket manufacturers, with NHTS approval, ought to get busy with products to do this with single use inflation canisters for when the tire bead is off the rim at tire sales stores so that the pressure can be properly calibrated and the surplus foam be removable. (NOT a DIY thing, however!). (Lots more ideas to post before Volt release).
(Motivation? A Thomas Edison bio, “1001 Inventions”).
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (5:07 pm)Tesla Motors ~ San Carlos, Ca.
Fisker Coachbuild ~ Orange County, Ca.
Future buyers of specialty cars like the Tesla Roadster and Fisker Karma will be very understanding if there are recalls which require free adjustment. People buying these cars are not initially using them as their main source of transport. And it will be sometime (maybe never) before we see an inexpensive “Civic” type car with a Tesla badge on it.
With 1000 Roadsters on the road. Tesla Motors opportunity to shine in now. The timing of the IPO is perfect. Tesla stock has the potential to gain in the short term. And repayment of government loans helps the stock price of any company which has borrowed. Reports of a delayed Leaf. And of modest manufacturing quantities on the Volt. Make Tesla the car to own. Especially if you live in Northern California. And if you are even loosely connected to the movement to get more electric cars on the road.
What will hold the stock price of Tesla down? Other mass produced electric vehicles that are also sold outright to the buyer. And growing debt.
A lease program from Nissan on it’s 85mph Leaf will not detract the interest of the Tesla buyer. A foreign concern like Cherry or BYD will not catch the attention of the Tesla buyer. GM announcing the sale of their 100,000th Volt will. This will be sometime in 2013? GM announcing the sale of their 1000th Converj will. This will be sometime in 2013?
Cadillac Converj
=D~
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (5:41 pm)hi George #25 …
Since GM stopped selling shares of stock. The price has been very volatile in the pink paper market.
What is “Pink Sheet”?
Pink Sheets used to literally be pink sheets of paper that brokers used to trade stocks that didn’t meet the listing requirements of an exchange, such as the New York Stock Exchange. Now, it’s the label for a computerized network that allows investors and brokers to buy and sell stocks without getting near an actual stock exchange.
In 2008, the number of companies listed on the Pink Sheets hit a record 4,570, and trading volume hit 820 billion shares — more than quadruple the level the year before, according to PinkSheets.com. 2009 is on track for another record, with 4,781 companies listed and a dollar volume of $47.4 billion through Nov. 9, on pace to beat last year’s $50.7 billion volume.
______________________________
It is not uncommon to see MOTORS LIQUIDATION (symbol MTLQQ.PK ~ formally GM) trade up or down as much as 50% in a week. This type of movement often involves somebody making falsely optimistic claims (the pump) via a press release or an e-mail about a company. Unsuspecting investors buy the “stock,” causing its price to double. The announcement of the new 40mpg Cruze being available in 2009 is an example.
As mentioned here many times at gm volt dot com. For stable stock activity on GM. Positive public perception of GM in required. Favorable news from Motor Trend, Car and Driver, Edmunds, and Consumer Reports is the foundation. Word of mouth from people like you and I will add a great deal of credibility to the new GM (symbol ~ NGMCO).
=D~
-1
Jan 31st, 2010 (5:44 pm)It’s going to be difficult if not impossible for any plug-in electric with a battery larger than the Volt’s to sell in large numbers (say 20,000 plus per year) as long as batteries cost $1000/kWhr.
I bet the Volt’s battery costs GM $16k. That is why they are struggling with the Volt’s pricing. If it costs them $40,000 and you remove $16,000 for the battery then they have to design, build, and market a $24,000 car that is powered by and electric motor and includes a gas engine and a generator. Plus of course there is a lot of new technology in there.
Of course economies of scale will come into play.
But my point is I believe battery cost will restrict long range battery only vehicles (say over 60 or so miles).
- Mark
Jan 31st, 2010 (5:56 pm)Climate Change is……
EE-Stor will…
The Toyota Prius can…
Just trying to stir up a slow day at http://www.gm-volt.com
-1
Jan 31st, 2010 (6:13 pm)Climate Change is… bogus.
EE-Stor will… power my ’79 someday.
The Toyota Prius can… never win me over. It’s fugly.
Jan 31st, 2010 (6:25 pm)You forgot Hydrogen fuel cells will… (g).
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (6:27 pm)I think it’s $1000 per usable KWh, so the Volt’s is 8K.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Jan 31st, 2010 (6:53 pm)1. A constant of the universe that will occur no matter what we do or do not do.
2. Continue to fuel speculation and live on in the comic books into the next century as it is wholly science fiction
3. Become it’s own division of Toyota and spawn ever increacing fugly cars. As well as never be an “electric” car no matter how they spin it
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:10 pm)I’m afraid anything related to carbon nanotube research will be a LOOONG time coming. Decades probably, before it can be feasible economically for any auto application. Few weeks ago, I held a peice of carbon nanotube cloth in my hand, developed for bullet proof cloth research. It worked, stopped the bullet cold, but that fistsize peice of cloth was valued at about half a million dollars.
The science is way behind the dreams, I’m afraid.
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:14 pm)It’s a given that before NGMCO issues their IPO. We will hear reports of an improving balance sheet. And see REAL action in the form of getting electric vehicles into the hands of the public. This could be the Operation Driveway demo-drive program hinted by Bob Lutz. The Cruze and Spark are welcome additions to the GM line. But it’s not the over-the-top action that is required.
To issue the GM IPO before these events is momentum still birth. If the IPO is properly offered. NGMCO may be able to clear a significant percent of the tax payer loan balance by early 2011. Positive feedback from Project Driveway along with loan reduction will create the conditions for continued upside. The addition of the Converj and an electric truck will maintain positive momentum in 2012.
We have a front row seat here at gm volt dot com. Please don’t over microwave the popcorn.
=D~
+2
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:18 pm)Off Topic:
I was at the DC auto show Friday. GM/Ford looked good. Volt was prominently displayed with LOTS of interest. Cruze looked awesome. Wife wanted to look at the Cruze while I was pulling her over to the Volt. Volt was not the current production model; didn’t have the correct hood, among other things…. but still presented really well.
Nissan DID NOT have a Leaf there. Not even in the electric vehicle section. No one to talk to about it. I Asked. Not even sure if they had a picture of it anywhere. For a car about to be released in a few months or so, something sure smelled fishy…..
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:21 pm)Ever the optimist, I’m watching advances in nanotech and science has a habit of making exponential spurts of progress. Even at a half million dollars, a couple of years ago it didn’t exist at any price. Besides, it MUST be pretty durable if they let you *hold* it (lol). Very cool, BTW.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:26 pm)Thanks for the update. I wanted to go but could not find time. Glad to here Ford and GM looked good.
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:28 pm)Thanks for the feedback on the show. That *does* seem odd about the LEAF being MIA. Did you manage to get the Mrs *to* the Volt? Was she as impressed with it as she was the Cruze?
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
-1
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:32 pm)Not true.
Nanotechnology is already in the planning stages for many common automotive products, such as windshield wipers and paint coatings.
Expect to see them within the next few years.
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:44 pm)The Volt or Tesla would make a great Super bowl Sunday ad.
Jan 31st, 2010 (7:56 pm)Hum?
1. The Leaf show car may have been damaged in transport. Nissan would surely want to display the Leaf in DC. It’s one of the main Nissan/GM battlefields.
2. Even if Nissan has realized previously unforeseen issues with the car. Wouldn’t they still show the non-working body in DC?
3. Has Nissan been notified of new Federal tariff laws? Making sale of the Leaf in the USA unprofitable?
4. Has the $7500 tax credit been Federally changed to pertain to the sale of homeland vehicles only?
5. Has an outside influence convinced Nissan that the Leaf is best placed on the back burner for now?
A web search shows recent video of the Leaf being driven in a desert area. Saguaro cactus and rugged terrain are visible. Saguaro cactus is found abundantly in Arizona. And the border area with California. Recent temperatures in Yuma and Phoenix show fairly moderate highs.
JDLR (Just doesn’t look right)
=D~
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:04 pm)Close race between the finalists….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJOSfNtK80Y
=D~
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:11 pm)I know, I was very disappointed. I was there to specifically bust their chops a little about the battery conditioning issues.
It was not there. I went back several times, just to make sure. There was an electric only section even, including the Volt drivetrain car, a few Think city cars, some other really small electric cars, forget the name, some really ugly big trucks, but NO LEAF. Even the Honda Clarity was there. Compressed air cars were there. Nissan electric division was MIA.
Weird.
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:17 pm)Sorry, I mean’t battery related applications. There are a few other areas it is dribbling into, (even these it will be a while though), but the tech related to battery specific applications is a different animal. The costs HAVE to come WAY down before anything nanotube infused makes sense.
+3
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:20 pm)If the Tesla Model S would never come to be, I would shed a tear over that one. Beautiful car.
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:23 pm)So the LEAF *WAS* at the DC auto show.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:29 pm)This is very strange.
The Leaf clearly was there. But it was not on Friday. I was in the area on the video, that section was cleared out. I thought it looked like a hole there. I had 3 other guys with me, None of us saw the Leaf during the whole day.
Why would they have moved it?
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:39 pm)In the DC green video. The price of the Leaf is reported as $30,000. And that it “will go on sale later this year”.
Leaf $30k + $7500 tax credit = $37,000 ?
Volt $32k + $7500 tax credit = $39,500 ?
Wonder how informed the reporter is? He said, “will go on sale” not “will be available on lease option” or “will be base priced at (X) with battery lease”.
BTW: When Tesla and Fisker mention the price of their cars. It’s understood it’s with all discounts and credits figured in.
=D~
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:39 pm)Leaf was only there Wed and Thurs. I was there Fri.
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=183462299592&index=1
WOW. Thought I was going nuts.
But still, why take it out early? And why was no one around to answer questions?
Jan 31st, 2010 (8:47 pm)But still, why take it out early? And why was no one around to answer questions?
Good point. Oh, the drama.
=D~
+1
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:16 pm)I guess that they took their award and went home.
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Jan 31st, 2010 (9:19 pm)Dan…I’ve heard of nitrogen & new kinds of gels being proposed in order to maintain the proper inflation/pressure in tires and in turn improve fuel efficiency.
However, a Prague-based company, Coda Development, has recently developed and patented a new kind device built into tires which uses the tire’s own centrifugal force during rolling to automatically inflate the tire to its optimal pressure by using atmospheric air.
Apparently, this invention is a cost-effective solution, which also improves the longevity of the tire and improves road safety by maintaining optimal pressure throughout the lifespans of tires (and eliminates the need for constant pressure checks). You can see and judge for yourself how this device works at the company’s own website: http://www.selfinflatingtire.com/index.html
Unfortunately, Coda is still loking for a major tire manufacturer to establish a partnership with. Goodyear are you listening? George, Sudbury, Ont., Canada…go volt
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:10 pm)Ingenious invention!
Be well,
Tagamet
Let’s Just Get The ***VOLTS’*** Wheels On The Road!!**********NPNS
Jan 31st, 2010 (10:10 pm)Carbon nanotubes for anodes in an automotive electric battery is going to take some time.
“Next few years” can be streached to 5-10years ‘tho.
Feb 1st, 2010 (12:53 am)01/19/10
Leaf swings through Middle Tennessee this week…
http://wpln.org/?p=13864
In 2010, the Nissan will first be available in CA, OR, WA, AZ, TN, and NC. The first of Nissan’s EV’s will be manufactured at Oppama, Japan, with additional capacity planned for Smyrna, Tennessee, USA. Meanwhile, lithium-ion batteries are being produced in Zama, Japan, by the Nissan-NEC JV with additional capacity planned for the USA, the UK and Portugal, and other locations.
Nissan’s leadership will accelerate the manufacturing of fully-functional electric vehicles in volume. Manufacturing volume will drive down cost, making zero-emission vehicles cost competitive with gasoline counterparts. Electric vehicles will likely be less expensive for people to drive with low-cost nighttime charging. It will be easy for people to save on emissions when they are saving money at the same time.
=D~
Feb 1st, 2010 (1:03 am)Dave, the liquidated stock isn’t connected in any way with the GM which is selling cars. It’s stock in the spun off company which holds all the dead assets and, as such, it’s guaranteed to be 100% worthless. The only good thing it’s good for is as an example of how financial markets can be wildly irrational. As far as press releases are concerned, GM has told everyone not to buy it because it will never have any value and there have been some stories on this.
The IPO will be under a different sticker and won’t be influenced in any way by the price of MTLQQ, which is a good thing cause at some point rationality has to prevail, which means this stock will trade at $0.
If you like living in the fast lane you’d be better off betting sports. At least you’d have a 50% chance of winning and you’d only have to pay commissions if you win. That beats this loser hands down.
+1
Feb 1st, 2010 (1:16 am)I will buy any American company that has vision, (stock or product) and has an alternative to the status quo…If the Volt is priced right, I will buy it…as for the Tesla model S…I will look into the design, but will ultimately go with price…They are both good investments.
Feb 1st, 2010 (1:45 am)I realize the new symbol is simply pink paper. Bob Lutz stated, “I don’t know why the stock is still being traded. Should have gone to zero”. Pink paper traders just keep betting on it. Yes, I know it is not “GM” stock. None the less. A person can still buy it at 30 cents in the morning and sell it at 38 cents at night (or vice versa). I have seen the price quickly rise from 55 cents to over a dollar. The price target of the manipulator is then hit. Followed by free fall, in 20 cent increments, back to 60 cents.
By all means.. avoid getting involved until NGMCO issues the IPO.
=D~
+1
Feb 1st, 2010 (5:32 am)Nanotech has been the basis of the A123 26650 Lithium cells that has been in production for a few years now.. They call it Nanophospate.. it enables 15 minute full charges and very long cycle life at deep discharges.
http://www.a123systems.com/a123/products
Feb 1st, 2010 (7:08 am)“Tesla Motors” is the third most searched topic on Yahoo this morning. Seems there is interest in the upcoming IPO.
=D~
Feb 1st, 2010 (7:17 am)I wish Tesla all the luck.
I wouldn’t mind getting in on GM’s IPO.
Feb 1st, 2010 (7:38 am)Wouldn’t it be cool to see them BOTH in the same ad?
Feb 1st, 2010 (8:05 am)All the sedan needs is a generator on a trailer, to be a EREV. In case you want to go to Florida once in a while. It will be interesting to see the pricing.
Feb 1st, 2010 (8:25 am)Seeing the Model S will be in the same bracket, essentially, as the Converj, I wouldn’t want to bet on Teslas long term survival.
In any case, after Statik panned it yesterday, I certainly don’t want to lose my money there. Seems a shame really, as it was via the Roadster that I came across the Volt, and, of course, this site.
Feb 1st, 2010 (9:44 am)“Nanotech” and “nanotube” are two VERY different things. Nonatech is everywhere. Even in todays fuel injected cars if you consider the level at which geometry of the injector nozzles affect the fuel distribution. Nanotubes, on the other hand, have fantastic potential, but the costs of nanotube production are very high, for a VERY small amount of product. This is, in a nutshell, the hump that needs to be gotten over before nanotubes enter mainstream, mass produced products in more than just “marketing level” amounts. Wish it weren’t so, but it is.
Feb 1st, 2010 (11:42 am)Absolutely NOT! Tesla is not going to be around in 2012.
Did I read this right. Tesla is ending production of the roadster in 2011 and not starting production of the sedan until 2012? Doesn’t that mean that at some point in 2011-2012 they’ll be a car company that doesn’t make any, you know, cars at all?
Good business plan that.
Feb 1st, 2010 (1:15 pm)Investing in the new GM is foolish. After the government bailout, they will be slowly sucked dry. Just look at what they’re doing to the banks they “saved”. Government funding is just like any other loan shark. They do you a “favor”, and then tax you to death. GM will die a slow painful death over the next 5-10 years instead of a quick restructuring of the assets that would have killed the brand name overnight.
Feb 1st, 2010 (1:33 pm)#4
Ditto. +1
Feb 1st, 2010 (1:57 pm)Don C has a reasonable argument not to buy this IPO. On the other hand, after settling, the stock should be a good place for speculation. Tesla may well not know how to grow a big organization with manufacturing and dealers and maintenance. But it is something that NEEDS to be done. And so, I suspect that some portion of investors will be those not looking for a stock windfall but looking to support the growth of EVs.
And should Musk et al, build the company to a position for M&A buyout – all the better for the growth of the electric car industry. I wish Tesla great success with their IPO and the Model S (which looks fantastic.) I support the electrification of transportation – and so will support any company with a good product to that end.
Feb 1st, 2010 (2:41 pm)Well . . . they have the money to lose.
And this investment will probably not make money any time soon (if at all).
Feb 2nd, 2010 (3:39 pm)Saw the tesla in the newest magazine, wow ed me and friends,
Punta Gorda, celebrity car zooms, hangs by the most noticed, corners. COOL.
The nec has ya pluged, electrician questions installs. Folks I work with have the venting to garage down to a nak.
Haven”t seen California since 1989, Van Nuys Blvd., Hello.